In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
powerpc/64s: Don't use DSISR for SLB faults
Since commit 46ddcb3950a2 ("powerpc/mm: Show if a bad page fault on data
is read or write.") we use page_fault_is_write(regs->dsisr) in
__bad_page_fault() to determine if the fault is for a read or write, and
change the message printed accordingly.
But SLB faults, aka Data Segment Interrupts, don't set DSISR (Data
Storage Interrupt Status Register) to a useful value. All ISA versions
from v2.03 through v3.1 specify that the Data Segment Interrupt sets
DSISR "to an undefined value". As far as I can see there's no mention of
SLB faults setting DSISR in any BookIV content either.
This manifests as accesses that should be a read being incorrectly
reported as writes, for example, using the xmon "dump" command:
0:mon> d 0x5deadbeef0000000
5deadbeef0000000
[359526.415354][ C6] BUG: Unable to handle kernel data access on write at 0x5deadbeef0000000
[359526.415611][ C6] Faulting instruction address: 0xc00000000010a300
cpu 0x6: Vector: 380 (Data SLB Access) at [c00000000ffbf400]
pc: c00000000010a300: mread+0x90/0x190
If we disassemble the PC, we see a load instruction:
0:mon> di c00000000010a300
c00000000010a300 89490000 lbz r10,0(r9)
We can also see in exceptions-64s.S that the data_access_slb block
doesn't set IDSISR=1, which means it doesn't load DSISR into pt_regs. So
the value we're using to determine if the fault is a read/write is some
stale value in pt_regs from a previous page fault.
Rework the printing logic to separate the SLB fault case out, and only
print read/write in the cases where we can determine it.
The result looks like eg:
0:mon> d 0x5deadbeef0000000
5deadbeef0000000
[ 721.779525][ C6] BUG: Unable to handle kernel data access at 0x5deadbeef0000000
[ 721.779697][ C6] Faulting instruction address: 0xc00000000014cbe0
cpu 0x6: Vector: 380 (Data SLB Access) at [c00000000ffbf390]
0:mon> d 0
0000000000000000
[ 742.793242][ C6] BUG: Kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0x00000000
[ 742.793316][ C6] Faulting instruction address: 0xc00000000014cbe0
cpu 0x6: Vector: 380 (Data SLB Access) at [c00000000ffbf390]
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.5 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.3% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-25). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it